HN user
Serious question. Are there any alternatives to HN? Been reading HN on and off since 2010 and the decline to this is painfully obvious. Used to learn a lot from reading on here but now only check or post out of habit and lack of a high quality alternative.
But, the floor of profits for a company is not denominated in dollars. It is shit you put in your mouth and eat or a useful product like a refrigerator which you can put things which allow you to not die.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, is some electricity, and arguably a waste of it.
At this point, I think people who can say 1. with a straight face are either intellectually dishonest or just repeat things others say.
The majority of teachers make a median US wage fairly early into their career and plenty make a multiple of it later on, on top of great benefits. Their job is no more challenging than nearly all other professions. “But they have to”… yes, everyone else has shit they have to deal with. The fact that the Waltons, crypto lottery winners, etc. exist is a separate problem that doesn’t mean teachers are underpaid.
Education majors are easier.The sky is blue. If we even remotely believe in a meritocracy (liberals often really don’t when you dig into their beliefs, granted) starting teachers should not make as much as a starting EE major. Nobody in their right mind would or should pursue an engineering career if teaching paid equivalently.
Trump tried to ban TikTok (and quite a lot more), but he’s orange and bad, so Biden repealed it. And tariffs are racist, so there’s that. America is not functioning well at this point and nothing indicates it will improve.
I’m not going to win any upvotes for saying this but I think it’s worth mentioning that this study is dishonest, blatantly politically-themed, and likely intended to score points within the authors’ circle. In other words, it’s meant to be printed off and used as toilet paper. Seeing papers like this is a frightening reminder, at least for me, about how inefficient and wasteful our society has become, in that we continue to funnel large amounts of resources to professions or groups like this.
A million years? Let’s crunch the numbers. I think the intellectual honest would acknowledge ashkhenazi intelligence differences. That took quite a lot less than a million years. And certainly intelligence is being selected for more than ever. We’re just, as a race, starting to experiment with gene modification. Would it really surprise you if minor modifications in intelligence aren’t made? It’s not going to be a million years for a significant leap bud.
As for the other point, it is indeed standing, on air.
They absolutely did not say anything about “obvious” discoveries. That is even more ridiculous of a claim. Which major breakthroughs in stem were “obvious”? Or are you speaking from hindsight, where in this brave new world we’re smarter than all previous generations?
They also did not say there are major advances but they are “really hard” (your words), they said there are no major advances left (by comparing them to continents, which we’ve already all discovered). There is no other way to interpret their words, unless you believe there are additional continents on earth to discover. Maybe atlantis?
The OP is not commenting on individual contributors vs large groups but I will comment on that as I disagree. You are describing the current state of physics (and many other stem fields) and the popular consensus about future advancements. While certainly having hundreds of researchers is necessary on many projects, you have no basis to claim an individual will not make a major breakthrough in the distant future. And frankly, as much as they are necessary, giant labs are strongly encouraged by our current culture. Large profits from monetizing research into products, corporate involvement and funding, staggering bloat in universities, fame-chasing, printing off papers like buzzfeed articles, unprecedented levels of organized fraud in academia… very little of the current culture is conducive to modest, brilliant individual contributors in many fields.
You have no idea how the culture will change in science, how much more intelligent and capable people will be than we are in the distant future with natural selection and gene modification, and whether there will be any more breakthroughs by individuals or small groups that will seem “obvious” in hundreds of years. To say otherwise is frankly dogmatic caveman thinking.
Literally your post, the top comment on the thread, leads with an unabashed claim that humans have already discovered all of the “major advances” in the sciences. It’s flabbergasting.
Regarding replicability, I disagree this is a problem at all. Writing shit code is not going to prevent someone highly capable from replicating your results. If anything, I empathize with researchers writing sloppy code. It’s a creative field and they already have to do enough editing and documentation. Omitting code or fabricating/manipulating evaluation results is what prevents replication.
Frankly, unlike the author, I think there’s too many people in the field. They produce a handful of papers worth reading every year along with thousands upon thousands of models that may or may not slightly improve performance on a specific task and then have no general value beyond that. And I don’t believe this will change much- ml is likely the most monetizable PhD path by a safe margin, so there is too much profit incentive to churn out crap at any cost.
Important to note that the audience of this article and Tiktok’s target market are disjoint. Relevant minds need to be swayed.
I find this take ridiculous. This is the liberal equivalent of “no systemic racism”. What would you call it when a significant portion of your company believes in woke values and promotes some of these individuals into influential roles where they have power to pressure people? I’m sure their influence on product always rationally optimizes shareholder value and is not influenced by their beliefs.
Homotopy type theory probably. Uses in modern theorem prover languages include verification of systems/hardware and formalization of math.
If you’re doing a lot of extra hours, not having to commute and getting some peace makes a huge difference in making it sustainable.
Modern crypto has to be the most ostentatious display of our generation’s detachment from reality and laze. I pray the big players pumping these like penny stocks on a much grander scale are eventually held accountable. While digital currency and decentralized finances are ideas societies should explore, modern crypto has served no other purpose than to funnel drug money and fund North Korea. I hope a crash becomes a reminder to at least some people that actual “value” involves natural resources being extracted and prepared with a lot of time and ingenuity required by humans, not thin air.
A lot to disagree with here, but off the bat, many of the highest paid software engineers are the ones working the very least or not at all.
I’m guessing this was an introductory course? Every college stuffs kids into courses they have no interest in. Society pressures them into college in the first place. Most introductory courses, perhaps not this one but especially in liberal arts, involve not much beyond agreeing with the professor’s personal opinions presented as fact to get an A. And, well, people like to cheat to get ahead, mooch off the government, etc. Today is probably worse than other periods; generations in the US are on a steep downhill slope, and academia and educators in general seem increasingly deranged. Convincing others this is a solvable problem sounds like a great way to get money.
The other responder said the same thing, but to add, a traveling nurse I’m friends with , in Texas, gets paid 5k a week if he chooses to work and chooses where he wants to work. So again, this is like making a judgment about software development working conditions by using people rest and vesting at FAANG as an example.
Getting a STEM degree at a state school and getting out as quickly as possible is arguably the smartest way to use college. Unfortunately, many 18 year olds and frankly many adults do not have the decision making skills to do this. Just because it’s technically possible to use the system beneficially doesn’t mean it’s working well.
Just like much of the healthcare system, government jobs, military contracting, etc., college is a glorified welfare-jobs program for much of the staff and arguably entire departments and schools as well as a business for much of the vampire administrators. Too much welfare relies on the current college system and there have been too many “EdD”’s, MFAs, etc. awarded for us to meaningfully back out of this system. I think the bough will break on society as a whole before anything happens to the school system, considering all the other additional subsystems sucking out resources. These degrees in certain fields have always been a fine vacation for the rich, but unfortunately we’ve beguiled the poor into pursuing them as well. Might as well call it an MLM scheme at this point.
If that were in any way even remotely representative of what is being defined as hate speech and weaponized, you might have a point. Tangentially, I’ve noticed a few occasions where rule enforcement for racial slurs seem to get bent quite often for the right democrats. Hard to trust the gavel-wielding infant cabal when there are multiple sets of rules. This is why free speech exists, so the bad apples in California don’t poison the rest of the tree.
You’re proving my point. “Hate speech” is defined by a very small group of nerds, who are in the 4th sd of privilege with white liberal jesus syndrome and who’ve spent most of their lives on computers or on vacation posting about how oppressed their lives are by christianity or patriarchy or some other malarkey. In other words, free speech is a better alternative to the people making decisions having god complexes while being completely detached from most of the rest of humanity.
Apples are red. The sky is blue. Twitter shadowbans and tinkers with who sees who. I wonder what the old guard will do with the codebase over the next few months.
This, in a nutshell, is the ivory tower conversation silicon valley liberals have been having with themselves for the past few years to justify their ever-creeping censorship. 90% of the people on the site should not have been banned in the first place. Obviously the overwhelming majority of people having this conversation at these companies are liberal and it just happens to turn out that everyone who needs to be banned is a conservative, and we’ll throw in a few people like Farrakhan who give the democrats bad optics.
Reading this is like a manifesto on the maladjusted millenial mind (sorry, this sentence was a coincidence). Didn’t we used to have movie tropes about deranged people who could not move on past high school? Is this “caught up in trauma from slight bullying (getting called ugly) in high school decades ago” the new normal? I’m just going to go out and say this- the author and likeminded people are just weird, and this shouldn’t be considered normal. Just tell the bully to piss off, like an adult, threaten something legal if they keep harassing you, and go back to enjoying your life. This cloying coddling of something that should be a nonissue a decade+ later is a both alarming and repulsive. And look- there are people who experience actual trauma in childhood who deserve sympathy- I’m absolutely not commenting at all on them.
Oh, here we go. Someone expressing an opinion you find extremely offensive on the internet is equivalent to someone directly, unambiguously causing a stampede. But, but, those hurtful internet words caused the “capital insurrection”! When did the modern liberal turn into the christian quack?
Yishan is trying to be impartial but some of that is bologna. What Elon really stands to lose is left-wingers leaving the platform in protest if a viable alternative emerges for the prominent figures to bring their audience over to. Right-wingers will come back in droves unless the platform dies altogether. Twitter would also get legislated to shreds in retaliation if the democrats have a strong majority + White House at any point in the future (assuming it maintains its relevancy).
But one part I really cannot reconcile is his capitalist interests and his free speech gambit are only potentially overlapping in the US. How many governments will put up with this crap or will many finally ban Twitter altogether? That statement even applies to democratic governments. That’s not going to increase his monetizable user base. Something’s got to give- and with a financed 43 billion it might be his morals. Perhaps he has another gameplan but it’s hard to imagine.
Immediately reminded me of: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Frampton
But in my limited understanding, this seems much more malicious and I’m less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Which, out of all foreign alliances to ever exist, were based on unconditional love?
Maybe I didn’t read closely enough but I believe the article only showed correlation for “all” movies and movies with <20 million budget. It doesn’t show blockbusters or anything like that. It’s worth mentioning, too, what is considered “high correlation” should be quite different from the stock market and should be carefully debated. 0 correlation isn’t just 0 correlation; it would imply these people are aliens with different sensory inputs.
Yes, I’m familiar- score is not the most accurate word choice in this case, although I stick by my point.